COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
RE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Responding Party/Municipal Prosecutor) v. THE TORONTO DISTRICT OF THE FREE METHODIST CHURCH OF CANADA (Moving Party/Defendant)
BEFORE: McMURTRY C.J.O. (IN CHAMBERS)
COUNSEL: Tim Bermingham and Dera J. Nevin for the moving party, The Toronto District of the Free Methodist Church of Canada
Paul Bigioni for the respondent
HEARD: May 20, 2004
On appeal from the judgment of Justice Vibert A. Lampkin dated March 8, 2004.
E N D O R S E M E N T
1While the decision of Lampkin J. is of obvious importance to the appellant, I am not satisfied that the hearing of this appeal by this court is essential in the public interest or for the due administration of justice.
2I have come to this conclusion for the following reasons:
(a) Neither the zoning by-law nor the decision of the Ontario Court of Justice have in any way altered the scope of the legal non-conforming use concept found in s. 34(9) of the Planning Act.
(b) The Court below did not accept an unreasonably broad definition of “building” under the zoning by-law.
(c) I do not find that there is any finding in the Reasons for Judgment of either court below that prevents the continuation of the use of the land in question as a seasonal camp.
3The applications for leave to appeal to this court on both conviction and sentence are therefore dismissed.
_____ “R. Roy McMurtry C.J.O.”